SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neeka who wrote (738513)1/19/2021 11:50:56 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793721
 
My wife is older than me and has more immediate health concerns than I do, so in our case it is probably a righteous outcome for us.

But here’s my problem (I don’t know if Gov Abbott intended this outcome):

Phases 1-a, b, and c were modified in a totally sensible way so as to get the vaccine to the right people, without the racist and other unreasonable intervention in some other areas.

BUT HERE'S THE BLUNDER: (If I already posted this, sorry):

Most vaccine to date has been distributed to hospitals, who have refused to vaccine non-customers (okay, patients). So, even though I paid as much as the next guy for the hospital to have that vaccine available, certain other people, are being selected on the basis of having previously been patients, by having an “invitation only” system for getting on their schedule. That isn’t right. They are actually “holding open” spots for patients while refusing appointments to others who want the vaccine. In fairness, UAMS in Arkansas also contacted me and said, “Hey, up you had cancer here, so you’re welcome to come in and get your vaccine”. But I don’t live there anymore. I think that isn’t right.

To his credit, Abbott has now started opening “mega” centers for vaccinations where more vaccine will be directed. But it wasn’t one of Abbott's greatest moments.

I like him a lot, though. I think he’s a fine governor.